Hydrohistorian
← My Water · Print / save as PDF
RISING SUN DITCH
Structure dossier · WDID 4500743 · 1 · COLORADO RIVER · DWR record
Where this page's figures come from
Generated 2026-08-27 23:45 by Hydrohistorian. Sources: DWR HydroBase snapshot HydroBase_CO_20260707 (history) + CDSS REST (current), USGS NWIS cross-checks. Engine v0.5.0 (2deb1d7) — every figure regenerates from this named code version and data image.
Where it sits
Location as DWR records it. Faint dots are the neighbouring water; click any to open it.
Which of its rights are out of priority?
Not computable for this structure: this structure is not on the modelled flow network, so no reference gage can honestly stand in for it.
Where it sits in line
Priority 1883-12-05 — 17th most senior of the 1378 structures with decreed rights in this water districtDWR's administrative subdivision of a river basin; the unit calls are usually stated in..
Under prior appropriationColorado's rule for sharing water: first in time, first in right. Age decides, not proximity or need., everything ahead of it in this line is satisfied in full before it receives any water. Immediately ahead: CLEAR CREEK DITCH (1883-11-08). Immediately behind: MAMM CREEK DITCH (1884-03-10).
Decreed rights (4)
| Admin noDWR's numeric encoding of a water right's seniority. Smaller is more senior; the integer part counts days from 1849-12-31 to the date that ranks the right. | AppropriatedWhen water was first put to beneficial use. It sets seniority unless a prior adjudication date is later. | AdjudicatedWhen the water court confirmed the right. A use decreed in 1975 was not a decreed use in 1955, however old the appropriation is. | AbsoluteA right actually put to use, as opposed to conditional -- a placeholder for a use not yet made. | ConditionalA right reserving a place in line for a use not yet made; it must be diligently pursued or it lapses. | Units | UsesWhat the court said this water may be used for -- irrigation, municipal supply, augmentation and so on. | Case |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12392.0 | 1883-12-05 | 1888-05-05 | 3.33 | 0.0 | C | IRRINDRECAUGOTH | 16 |
| 13484.0 | 1886-12-01 | 1888-05-05 | 8.5 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 64 |
| 37725.0 | 1953-04-15 | 1965-07-09 | 9.0 | 0.0 | C | IRRAUG | 226 |
| 53691.53095 | 1995-05-15 | 1997-12-31 | 0.033 | 0.0 | C | IRRCOM |
Legal record & documents
12 decreed actions on record across
5 court cases:
97CW0152, CA4954, 98CW0131, CA0089, 06CW0121.
Every case, dated
| Case | Actions | Latest adjudication | Types |
|---|---|---|---|
97CW0152 | 1 | 1997-12-31 | S |
CA4954 | 1 | 1965-07-09 | S |
98CW0131 | 6 | 1965-07-09 | O, S |
CA0089 | 2 | 1888-05-05 | O |
06CW0121 | 2 | 1888-05-05 | O |
DWR's own records for this structure: net amounts · transactions & adjudication history · scanned decrees (search a case number there for the imaged document). On this site: the district's full legal picture →
Recorded use (last 15 years on record)
In a median year this structure has a recorded diversion of 3,043 AF. Its most recent year on record, 2024, came in at 3,918 AF — 129% of that, and 14th lowest of the 15 years with a recorded volume.
This structure records both diversions and reservoir releases — they are separate water movements and are accounted separately below.
| Year | Diverted (AFA volume: one acre covered a foot deep, about 326,000 gallons -- roughly a suburban household's outdoor use for a year.) | Compared with its own record | Released (AF) | Days recorded | Peak (cfs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 2,615 | 3rd lowest of 15 · 86% of median | — | 187 | 16.0 |
| 2011 | 2,155 | 1st lowest of 15 · 71% of median | — | 192 | 8.0 |
| 2012 | 2,794 | 5th lowest of 15 · 92% of median | — | 174 | 12.0 |
| 2013 | 2,610 | 2nd lowest of 15 · 86% of median | — | 184 | 11.0 |
| 2014 | 2,889 | 6th lowest of 15 · 95% of median | — | 219 | 11.0 |
| 2015 | 4,249 | 15th lowest of 15 · 140% of median | 2,101 | 220 | 13.0 |
| 2016 | 2,723 | 4th lowest of 15 · 90% of median | — | 213 | 12.0 |
| 2017 | 3,541 | 12th lowest of 15 · 116% of median | — | 202 | 12.0 |
| 2018 | 3,163 | 9th lowest of 15 · 104% of median | — | 212 | 12.0 |
| 2019 | 3,043 | 8th lowest of 15 · 100% of median | — | 190 | 16.0 |
| 2020 | 2,933 | 7th lowest of 15 · 96% of median | — | 196 | 10.0 |
| 2021 | 3,239 | 10th lowest of 15 · 106% of median | — | 211 | 8.0 |
| 2022 | 3,483 | 11th lowest of 15 · 114% of median | — | 186 | 18.0 |
| 2023 | 3,882 | 13th lowest of 15 · 128% of median | — | 265 | 14.5 |
| 2024 | 3,918 | 14th lowest of 15 · 129% of median | — | 305 | 12.0 |
Trends for this structure
Recorded use is rising over its last 15 recorded years (+87 AF/yr, Mann-Kendall p=0.003).
How good is our record of it?
Grade A (9/10 points) — the components below are the finding; the letter alone is not.
The rubric, component by component
| Check | State | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| identity | complete | name, type, and water source all on file |
| decreed rights | on file | 4 right(s), seniority decoded |
| diversion record | present | 10129 measured days; currency unknown (no data-coverage date to compare against) |
| record continuity | continuous | 96% of the irrigation seasons in 1975-2024 carry measured days |
| published-record stability | stable | no upstream revisions recorded against this structure |
Advisory reading aid on public data — not an administrative or legal conclusion, not a title opinion, and not a substitute for DWR administration or an engineer's analysis. Methodology review status is disclosed at hydrohistorian's basin pages.